Re: Ruby 2.0 in F19

2013-01-02 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 21.12.2012 20:58, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky napsal(a): Sigh ... now there are *three* incompatible Ruby syntax / semantics standards to deal with. Don't spread FUD please. Why don't we just ship 'rvm' or 'rbenv' and force everyone to manage their own Ruby environments? ;-) There used to

Re: Ruby 2.0 in F19

2013-01-02 Thread Stijn Hoop
Hi, On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:59:46 +0100 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 21.12.2012 20:58, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky napsal(a): Why don't we just ship 'rvm' or 'rbenv' and force everyone to manage their own Ruby environments? ;-) There used to be RVM in Fedora, but we dropped it,

Re: Ruby 2.0 in F19

2013-01-02 Thread Vít Ondruch
Dne 2.1.2013 12:08, Stijn Hoop napsal(a): Hi, On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:59:46 +0100 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 21.12.2012 20:58, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky napsal(a): Why don't we just ship 'rvm' or 'rbenv' and force everyone to manage their own Ruby environments? ;-) There used to

Re: Ruby 2.0 in F19

2012-12-21 Thread M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 4:47 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote: Hi everybody, According to Ruby 2.0 release schedule: - code freeze: 23 Dec. - 2.0.0-rc1 release: 1W Jan. (expected) - 2.0.0-rc2 release: 1W Feb. (expected) - 2.0.0-p0 release: 24 Feb. the official release

Re: Ruby 2.0 in F19

2012-12-20 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:47:56 +0100 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote: Hi everybody, ...snip... - Due to better integration of JRuby into Fedora [3], we would like to take this opportunity to restructure RubyGems folder layout. This should allow us to support Rubinius in the

Re: Ruby 2.0 in F19

2012-12-20 Thread Bohuslav Kabrda
- Original Message - On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:47:56 +0100 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote: Hi everybody, ...snip... - Due to better integration of JRuby into Fedora [3], we would like to take this opportunity to restructure RubyGems folder layout. This should